The point being, Parthia is a harder target than Gaul, which is why the Romans never actually conquered it. Just holding our own against the Parthians would be a respectable accomplishment. Taking Mesopotamia from them would be a very impressive feat (noting that no Roman ever accomplished it for any length of time).

Conquests around the south of Arabia would require the Romans to cultivate a navy on the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, not the sort of thing I'd expect them to be very interested in.

All good. The single source I saw on on Gobanitio indicates he'd be pretty young, maybe 16 or 17.
That's fine. His only relevant skill for my purposes is horsemanship.
 
Again, I don't want to conquer Persia, just break of Mesopotamia as a client kingdom. Possibly look into going south through Egypt to Yemen, and onto Indian trade.... The wealth of the Orient beckons.

Egypt is currently a client state under Ptolemy XII right now. Moving forces through there might be tricky. There's also the Nabitean Kingdom between Egypt and Yemen that might possibly be a problem and THEN we'd have to fight Axum for control of Yemen, which means sending legions to Eithiopia. . .
 
I think you mean Trajan, not Hadrian.



I counter those mediocre to ok military leaders with Trajan and Septimus Severus lol. And I think Caesar would have been more than capable of defeating Parthia.

So all we have to do is be the equal of Caesar and Parthia is ours. . . .

Marc Antony wasn't exactly mediocre to ok, he was pretty damn good. But his arrogance and numerous flaws destroyed him one by one, as well as his attempt to invade Parthia, which was essentially the "Russia in the Winter" meme of the First Century BC. He would never have lost to Augustus himself in a straight fight, and probably could've bested Agrippa, but he never got the chance. He lost his support, his popularity, and his troops one by one to the politicking and scheming of Augustus. When time came for the final battle, what few men he had left were slipping away to join the enemy in the dead of night.
 
We could always go for Illyria, which was Caesar's original target before opportunity presented itself in his other province of transalpine Gaul (which he was granted last minute after the death of the sitting governor there).
 
We could always go for Illyria, which was Caesar's original target before opportunity presented itself in his other province of transalpine Gaul (which he was granted last minute after the death of the sitting governor there).

Illyria is a Single Legion Province. . .Not exactly a springboard to launch conquest from. . .
 
Marc Antony wasn't exactly mediocre to ok, he was pretty damn good. But his arrogance and numerous flaws destroyed him one by one, as well as his attempt to invade Parthia, which was essentially the "Russia in the Winter" meme of the First Century BC. He would never have lost to Augustus himself in a straight fight, and probably could've bested Agrippa, but he never got the chance. He lost his support, his popularity, and his troops one by one to the politicking and scheming of Augustus. When time came for the final battle, what few men he had left were slipping away to join the enemy in the dead of night.
Ehh, I dispute this. He was a talented subordinate officer sure. But whenever granted independent command, he really wasn't that impressive ( as shown in the Parthian campaign). And no, I rank Agrippa way over Mark Antony. I mean I really don't even see how you could put them in the same league.

Illyria is a Single Legion Province. . .Not exactly a springboard to launch conquest from. . .

Tell that to Caesar. It was one of his three provinces, and until the Helveti started making trouble in transalpine Gaul, that was where he was going to get his great conquest by every indication.
 
Last edited:
Right now Parthia is divide and has contenders for the throne. Also they were funding our current enemy on the east. They are also fighting a on and off agian war against most of thier neighbors.

What I think we should do is push for control of Egypt when the Ptolemy leaves it to Rome in his will. That way we can go in administrative the hell out of it and build up support at home with supplying the grain dole with Egyptian grain. Which would both be profitable and give us popular support back home.

We should not be making plans until we find out who comes out on top of the civil war. The only good thing is we are not important enough to purge yet.
 
Caesar as of right now is 16 and High Priest of Jupiter Optimus Maximus. He won't be conquering much of anything for awhile. . .
I mainly meant 'over the course of our respective careers'. Of course, if we can get to Gaul a few decades early, that's great!

For the moment though, smaller ambitions will serve.

[X] Plan All In
 
Last edited:
Egypt is currently a client state under Ptolemy XII right now. Moving forces through there might be tricky. There's also the Nabitean Kingdom between Egypt and Yemen that might possibly be a problem and THEN we'd have to fight Axum for control of Yemen, which means sending legions to Eithiopia. . .

My ideal empire is somewhere between Justinian and Suleiman, and as much thalassocratic as militaristic: in the west, Italia up to the Alps, Africa, the western Isles, perhaps part of OTL Provence and the Hispanic coast; the Danube provinces, clientized a la Transylvania if not annexed a la Dacia, securing the soft underbelly of Illyricum (it is no coincidence that Trajan focused on Mesopotamia and Dacia; Illyricum and Syria are the soft underbellies of the Roman Empire). The east, with the Zagros, has neutered Persia, freeing one's hand to expand their tendrils into eastern Africa and Arabia.

Gaul, especially northern Gaul, is strictly speaking unnecessary to this vision, but given Roman cultural and political mores a probable prelude to any oriental excursions. Hispania, being relatively isolated behind the Pyrenees, is somewhat more intriguing to such an empire although the interior (beyond say Andalusia and the Catalan and Valencian coasts) can be clientized rather than annexed outright.

Arabia can be influenced via the Red Sea (which of course requires something of a different mindset, but seeing as this is a quest.... and if Mesopotamia is subdued through the Persian gulf. Trade through what eventually became the Hejaz provides an alternate route.
 
Right now Parthia is divide and has contenders for the throne. Also they were funding our current enemy on the east. They are also fighting a on and off agian war against most of thier neighbors.

What I think we should do is push for control of Egypt when the Ptolemy leaves it to Rome in his will. That way we can go in administrative the hell out of it and build up support at home with supplying the grain dole with Egyptian grain. Which would both be profitable and give us popular support back home.

We should not be making plans until we find out who comes out on top of the civil war. The only good thing is we are not important enough to purge yet.

Ptolemy doesn't leave Egypt to Rome in his will, the Throne Passes to his young son, who then gets killed by Caesar who then puts Cleopatra on the Throne. Then she backs Antony at Actium and afterwards Augustus Conquers Egypt.

Unless you plan to Change things some 20 years down the line, that's what happens with Egypt.

You are thinking of Pontus, who Mithradates' Son leaves to Rome in his will, not Egypt. . .
 
Ptolemy doesn't leave Egypt to Rome in his will, the Throne Passes to his young son, who then gets killed by Caesar who then puts Cleopatra on the Throne. Then she backs Antony at Actium and afterwards Augustus Conquers Egypt.

Unless you plan to Change things some 20 years down the line, that's what happens with Egypt.

You are thinking of Pontus, who Mithradates' Son leaves to Rome in his will, not Egypt. . .
Ptolemy the XI left Egypt to Rome in his will. But Sulla did not ratify it so Ptolemy the XII ruled instead as a Roman client state.
 
Hm.

There's a fairly good chance of Cleopatra appearing in this quest, now that I think about it; I hope she gets a good treatment.
 
The Getae/Dacians are independent right now and are still enjoying sending messengers to Zalmoxis by jumping onto gathered spears and all that, right? If enough of Thrace is under control later on we could mosey on over there and see if we can not cut to ribbons by a falx, it'd be interesting as a setting.
 
The Getae/Dacians are independent right now and are still enjoying sending messengers to Zalmoxis by jumping onto gathered spears and all that, right? If enough of Thrace is under control later on we could mosey on over there and see if we can not cut to ribbons by a falx, it'd be interesting as a setting.

Dacia has a bit of native gold production too, which we could use to fund further conquests. . .

Cleopatra won't be born for another 16 years.

I mean, it didn't stop Caesar, but then again, neither did crippling debt, threat of exile, or the laws and traditions of the Republic.

As I said, for such a legend, Caesar was astoundingly bad with money. . .
 
Last edited:
You fool!

You have tempted the waifu wars!
Better men than me have fallen to the Cleopatra shipping wars.

Cleopatra won't be born for another 16 years.

I mean, it didn't stop Caesar, but then again, neither did crippling debt, threat of exile, or the laws and traditions of the Republic.
That said, yes, 30+ year age differences. Nooot sure I want to RP that in a quest, though I couldn't resist the joke.

EDIT:

You know, we could honorably and without undue squick hope for her as a daughter-in-law?

If this were, say, a Crusader Kings game, she would be the target for stats-oriented marriage in her generation. :p
 
Last edited:
[Thinks over previous comments about Cleopatra.]

Although... well. Militating against her as a daughter-in-law...

Cleopatra VII of Egypt had four great-grandparents. Two of whom were the son and daughter of the other two. So... maybe not? o_O
 
Last edited:
If this were, say, a Crusader Kings game, she would be the target for stats-oriented marriage in her generation. :p

Somewhere, Octavia Minor is weeping, and Livia Drusilla is screeching with pure, unadulterated rage. :V

[Thinks over previous comments about Cleopatra.]

Although... well. Militating against her as a daughter-in-law...

Cleopatra VII of Egypt had four great-grandparents. Two of whom were the son and daughter of the other two. So... maybe not? o_O

If you're really doing this CK2 style, that's just a bonus.
 
Last edited:
I mean, I know intellectually that the Ptolemaic family tree looked more like a telephone pole, it's just... awe-inspiring in a ghastly manner to actually do the math, so to speak.
 
Back
Top